Minds: Synthetic Market Research

Read Study Plan

get_study_plan

Read-onlyIdempotent

Reads the latest saved revision and full review of one draft. Creates or changes nothing and starts no research.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "draftPlanId": "<draftPlanId>"
    },
    "name": "get_study_plan"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`study`	No	Study id or name. Omit to use the active Study of this MCP session.
`draftPlanId`	Yes	Existing draft plan to read at its latest revision.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`studyId`	No	Study the plan belongs to.
`revision`	No	Draft revision to confirm.
`nextAction`	No	What to do next: show the draft and wait for explicit confirmation.
`draftPlanId`	No	Draft plan to confirm with start_study_run.
`draftReview`	No	The saved draft as reviewed: questions, methods, outputs and confirmation choices.
`workspaceUrl`	No	Authenticated Minds workspace link for the Study. In your final reply, include this URI and every other Minds workspace URI returned in the result, including each individual Mind profile link attached to a linked name. Display every complete URI verbatim as inline code, preserving every character, including its scheme, query string and trailing slash.
`audienceAttachment`	No	With study.audienceIds: attached (added now) and alreadyAttached Audience IDs.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 9, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / workspaceUrl / description

Previous value: -"Authenticated Minds workspace link for the Study."New value: +"Authenticated Minds workspace link for the Study. In your final reply, include this URI and every other Minds workspace URI returned in the result, including each individual Mind profile link attached to a linked name. Display every complete URI verbatim as inline code, preserving every character, including its scheme, query string and trailing slash."

Changed1 schema field changedNov 7, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / workspaceUrl

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Authenticated Minds workspace link for the Study.",
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}

AddedOct 8, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the "creates or changes nothing" clause largely restates structured data. The genuinely additive detail is "latest saved revision," which clarifies which revision the caller receives, but the description says nothing about what "full review" entails beyond what the output schema presumably carries.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the read action and immediately followed by the negative guarantees. No filler or repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present the description need not explain return values, and annotations carry the safety profile, so the remaining scope is small. The only soft gap is that "full review" is left unexpanded, though the output schema is the natural place for that.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the nested study object is already documented (id takes precedence over name, omit to use the active Study), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only implies that draftPlanId targets a single draft and adds no format or precedence detail beyond that.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a specific verb+resource: it reads one draft plan's latest saved revision plus its full review. The phrase "one draft" sharply scopes it against list-oriented siblings like list_study_drafts and mutation siblings like revise_study_plan, but it never names a sibling outright, so differentiation is implied rather than stated.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The second sentence effectively fences off misuse by stating "Creates or changes nothing and starts no research," telling the agent this is not the tool for editing or running research. It stops short of naming which sibling to use instead when the agent does want to mutate or run a study.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Minds: Synthetic Market Research tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.